E Z Peaces wrote:
Boden wrote:
E Z Peaces wrote:
Jeff Wisnia wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:



I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
division of the local power company. This was back when
they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
had to know something about electronics. They would get
electronic interference complaints which were often traced
to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
one that many people don't even think of today.

TDD



Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.

If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving
that a 60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24
vac on it can cause interference at radio frequencies?

Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the
poles on nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt?
G

According to the FCC Interference Handbook, defective doorbell
transformers are often a source of interference to TVs and other
household electronics. It may be a neighbor's transformer.

Yes.

I think it happens when part of the core comes loose and vibrates.

Nope, that cant produce electrical interference.

If the Guberment says so it must be so. I just don't believe it.

Several electric utilities say so.

Not that last bit of yours they dont.

It can also come from microarcs in transformers on poles. When they get a complaint, they check poles with an
ultrasound detector to pick up noise from an arc.

Different effect entirely.

When a doorbell transformer fails, I imagine it's usually an open primary.

Yes, because thats the thinnest wire.

When it first opens, I imagine the vibration of the
transformer could keep the break arcing indefinitely.

Nope, you wont get vibration if its got an open primary.

You dont even have enough current to maintain the arc. Completely different to pole transformers.

Craig M wrote:
That pulse can pack a pretty good hit, want to try something, flash a 9 volt
batt on the low voltage side of a doorbell transformer, and feel what you
get on the other side.
that pulse can back feed through the house wiring, and posiblilty zap
something else.
Thats all I was worried about.

I used to do that with a AA cell and a transformer made to energize two
conductors of a telephone cable to light a dial. Occasionally I found
an unsuspecting person to hold the plug.

I also used to enjoy putting my tongue on the terminals of a 9 volt
battery.

The doorbell might absorb some of the pulse, but not as well as a
resistive load. I agree that if you didn't get shocked pressing the
button, you might get shocked releasing it.

Boden wrote:

E Z Peaces wrote:

Jeff Wisnia wrote:

The Daring Dufas wrote:




I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
division of the local power company. This was back when
they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
had to know something about electronics. They would get
electronic interference complaints which were often traced
to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
one that many people don't even think of today.

TDD




Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.

If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that
a 60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on
it can cause interference at radio frequencies?

Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles
on nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? G

Jeff


According to the FCC Interference Handbook, defective doorbell
transformers are often a source of interference to TVs and other
household electronics. It may be a neighbor's transformer. I think
it happens when part of the core comes loose and vibrates.


If the Guberment says so it must be so. I just don't believe it.


There's always something new to learn....

When I asked for a cite I was thinking only of properly operating
doorbell equipment.

I located this FCC cite:

http://tinyurl.com/63ob78

(It's on page 14 of the .pdf document.)

It sayss there's a thermostatic overload inside (some?) doorbell
xformers designed to protect them from overheating and starting a fire
if the doorbell button sticks on - or there's a short in the secondary
side wiring.

The report says that those thermal overloads (which I expect break the
120 volt primary circuit.) cycle off and back on around once every seven
seconds and that the inductive spark at its contacts can propogate
through house wiring and cause flashes of interference on a tv or
"static clicks" in radios.

Who woulda thunk it?

I wonder how long that cycling mode would continue before those thermal
overload contacts got burned enough to stop connecting and leave an open
circuit there.

That's the second time I've made a mistake this year...Thank G_d it's
almost December. G

Jeff

--
Jeffry Wisnia
(W1BSV + Brass Rat '57 EE)
The speed of light is 1.8*10^12 furlongs per fortnight.

On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:38:04 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

Jeff Wisnia wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:
Bill wrote:


I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
division of the local power company. This was back when
they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
had to know something about electronics. They would get
electronic interference complaints which were often traced
to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
one that many people don't even think of today.

TDD


Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.

If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that a
60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on it
can cause interference at radio frequencies?

Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles on
nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? G

Jeff


Do you know what voltage most (USA) doorbells operate on?

TDD
I've got 3 different ones floating around - 12, 16, and 24 volts AC.
(They would work just as well on lower voltage DC)

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:47:24 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

PeterD wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:14:34 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

Leroy wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:
Jeff Wisnia wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:
Bill wrote:

I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
division of the local power company. This was back when
they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
had to know something about electronics. They would get
electronic interference complaints which were often traced
to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
one that many people don't even think of today.

TDD

Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.

If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that a
60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on it
can cause interference at radio frequencies?

Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles on
nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? G

Jeff

Do you know what voltage most (USA) doorbells operate on?

TDD
twenty volts or under, while thermostat transformers are typically
twenty four volts.

I believe I asked Jeff. Do you know what your
name is?

TDD

You didn't ask Jeff personally. Had you done so, it would have been an
email, instead you asked a general question on Usenet, and someone was
nice enough to reply with good information. And, yes, we know what
your name is: "Asshole".


I didn't ask you either. You obviously missed the
point of the question, it was a little dig. I did
not ask the general either. *snicker*

TDD

You're still an asshole...

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:52:28 -0600, Jim Redelfs
wrote:

You could have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and money by simply
turning-off the transformer and removing the doorbell button. Let 'em
KNOCK.

Nice idea, but there are situations where that just won't suffice:
what about people who live up on the third floor of a big house, or
who are deaf and need lights to flash when someone rings?

PeterD wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:47:24 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

PeterD wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:14:34 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

Leroy wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:
Jeff Wisnia wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:
Bill wrote:

I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
division of the local power company. This was back when
they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
had to know something about electronics. They would get
electronic interference complaints which were often traced
to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
one that many people don't even think of today.

TDD
Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.

If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that a
60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on it
can cause interference at radio frequencies?

Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles on
nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? G

Jeff

Do you know what voltage most (USA) doorbells operate on?

TDD
twenty volts or under, while thermostat transformers are typically
twenty four volts.

I believe I asked Jeff. Do you know what your
name is?

TDD
You didn't ask Jeff personally. Had you done so, it would have been an
email, instead you asked a general question on Usenet, and someone was
nice enough to reply with good information. And, yes, we know what
your name is: "Asshole".

I didn't ask you either. You obviously missed the
point of the question, it was a little dig. I did
not ask the general either. *snicker*

TDD

You're still an asshole...

I consider myself to be an actinic sphincter.
It sounds more professional. People who know
my mother call me SOB.

TDD

wrote:
On Thu, 20 Nov 2008 22:38:04 -0600, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

Jeff Wisnia wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:
Bill wrote:

I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
division of the local power company. This was back when
they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
had to know something about electronics. They would get
electronic interference complaints which were often traced
to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
one that many people don't even think of today.

TDD

Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.

If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that a
60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on it
can cause interference at radio frequencies?

Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles on
nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? G

Jeff

Do you know what voltage most (USA) doorbells operate on?

TDD
I've got 3 different ones floating around - 12, 16, and 24 volts AC.
(They would work just as well on lower voltage DC)

Dang! Nobody seemed to get the little dig at Jeff.
What you will find are 6, 8, 10, 12, 16 and 24 volts
AC. Some really old stuff will be DC dry cell powered
but only if the owner wants to keep it original for
nostalgic or antique collecting purposes. Most of the
doorbell transformers I install have triple taps for
8, 16 and 24 volts. Many doorbells will need a 10 volt
transformer and if you need 24 volts to ring your ding
dong you're either deaf or have a seriously complicated
system. I have setup some serious systems for industrial
and commercial buildings by making use of the very loud
and fun to play with devices manufactured by Edwards
Signaling which now belongs to GE. My personal favorite:

http://tinyurl.com/5zkoow

TDD

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:17:04 -0500, KLS wrote:

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:52:28 -0600, Jim Redelfs
wrote:

You could have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and money by simply
turning-off the transformer and removing the doorbell button. Let 'em
KNOCK.

Nice idea, but there are situations where that just won't suffice:
what about people who live up on the third floor of a big house, or
who are deaf and need lights to flash when someone rings?

I've disconnected my doorbell a long time ago. Some teens think it's
cute to ring doorbells at night. I like knockers, though--even better
with salt and pepper.

On Nov 21, 7:51�pm, Phisherman wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:17:04 -0500, KLS wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:52:28 -0600, Jim Redelfs
wrote:

You could have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and money by simply
turning-off the transformer and removing the doorbell button. �Let 'em
KNOCK.

Nice idea, but there are situations where that just won't suffice:
what about people who live up on the third floor of a big house, or
who are deaf and need lights to flash when someone rings? �

I've disconnected my doorbell a long time ago. �Some teens think it's
cute to ring doorbells at night. �I like knockers, though--even better
with salt and pepper.

a neighbors 2 kids knick knocked and became a real nuisance to my aged
grandma.

the older brother had the little one do the dirty deed.

I tired of this, stumbled onto my last halloween mask and chased the
young one down the street. his dad came out yelled what are you doing
to my son?

after a quick discussion the offenders got a good spanking

In article ,
KLS wrote:

You could have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and money
by simply turning-off the transformer and removing the
doorbell button. Let 'em KNOCK.

Nice idea

Thank-you.

but there are situations where that just won't
suffice: what about people who live up on the
third floor of a big house

Post a sign: "Knock LOUDLY!"

or who are deaf

Post a sign: "Knock REALLY LOUDLY!"

and need lights to flash when someone rings?

That's a good question. How did these unfortunate people manage before
electricity? After all, it's doing WITHOUT all these annoying and
unnecessary conveniences that will save the planet.

Gawd, this is scary. You sad folks probably voted, too.
--
sigh
JR

In article ,
The Daring Dufas wrote:

My personal favorite:

http://tinyurl.com/5zkoow

Now THAT's my kind of "doorbell"!

Deaf people on the 10th floor and all the ahem "residents" of the
nearby cemetery will take notice.
--

JR

In article ,
Phisherman wrote:

I like knockers, though--even better
with salt and pepper.

Or whipped cream or baby oil. oops

"WOW! What KNOCKERS!"

"Thank-you, Doctor!"
--

JR

Jim Redelfs wrote:
In article ,
The Daring Dufas wrote:

My personal favorite:

http://tinyurl.com/5zkoow

Now THAT's my kind of "doorbell"!

Deaf people on the 10th floor and all the ahem "residents" of the
nearby cemetery will take notice.

I had a friend who was having problems with
Bulgarians stealing the copper and aluminum
out of his small apartment complex. I took
a motion sensing floodlight and an Edwards
120 volt square fire horn which we installed
at the rear of the apartments. One night he
was awakened by the wonderfully loud obnoxious
sound of that horn accompanied by some equally
loud screams and cursing in the local Bulgarian
dialect. The next morning he found a lot of blood,
bits of dark flesh and torn black clothing on
the barbed wire fence. For some reason his losses
to the vandalizing thieves abated.

TDD

E Z Peaces wrote in
:

Jeff Wisnia wrote:
The Daring Dufas wrote:


I had a friend some years ago who ran the communications
division of the local power company. This was back when
they had HF radios for communications and the techs actually
had to know something about electronics. They would get
electronic interference complaints which were often traced
to doorbell transformers. It was a very common problem and
one that many people don't even think of today.

TDD


Sorry, but I have a hard time believing that.

If it was "a very common problem", can you offer a cite proving that
a 60 hz transformer and 10-50 feet of unshielded wire with 24 vac on
it can cause interference at radio frequencies?

Wouldn't you expect that if that story was true those big pole pig
transformers and all that higher voltage wiring running on the poles
on nearly every street would have caused the radios to melt? G

Jeff


According to the FCC Interference Handbook, defective doorbell
transformers are often a source of interference to TVs and other
household electronics. It may be a neighbor's transformer. I think
it happens when part of the core comes loose and vibrates.

Interference from a neighbors transformer is rampant in that when people
realize it uses 3 bucks of electricity a year to run they buy a couple
of hundred feet of copper cable and conduit (so it's code compliant) and
illegaly trench it to the neighbors power.

E Z Peaces wrote in
:

Craig M wrote:
That pulse can pack a pretty good hit, want to try something, flash a
9 volt batt on the low voltage side of a doorbell transformer, and
feel what you get on the other side.
that pulse can back feed through the house wiring, and posiblilty zap
something else.
Thats all I was worried about.

I used to do that with a AA cell and a transformer made to energize
two conductors of a telephone cable to light a dial. Occasionally I
found an unsuspecting person to hold the plug.

I also used to enjoy putting my tongue on the terminals of a 9 volt
battery.

That was cool wasn't it! Did you also used to eat the paper paste in
kiddie school art class?


The doorbell might absorb some of the pulse, but not as well as a
resistive load. I agree that if you didn't get shocked pressing the
button, you might get shocked releasing it.

Phisherman wrote in
:

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 18:17:04 -0500, KLS wrote:

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 07:52:28 -0600, Jim Redelfs
wrote:

You could have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and money by
simply turning-off the transformer and removing the doorbell button.
Let 'em KNOCK.

Nice idea, but there are situations where that just won't suffice:
what about people who live up on the third floor of a big house, or
who are deaf and need lights to flash when someone rings?

I've disconnected my doorbell a long time ago. Some teens think it's
cute to ring doorbells at night. I like knockers, though--even better
with salt and pepper.

So is there a rating system for how beefy they are? You know, chincy
aluminum, steel, thick brass, etc. I would think something like a 3.8 oz
double dense would have a 38DD rating. I'd kill all my power to get hold
of knockers like that.

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:26:03 -0600, Jim Redelfs
wrote:

In article ,
KLS wrote:

You could have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and money
by simply turning-off the transformer and removing the
doorbell button. Let 'em KNOCK.

Nice idea

Thank-you.

but there are situations where that just won't
suffice: what about people who live up on the
third floor of a big house

Post a sign: "Knock LOUDLY!"

or who are deaf

Post a sign: "Knock REALLY LOUDLY!"

You must not know any deaf people personally. Your ignorance is
showing.

and need lights to flash when someone rings?

That's a good question. How did these unfortunate people manage before
electricity? After all, it's doing WITHOUT all these annoying and
unnecessary conveniences that will save the planet.

They survived by being cut off from the world, basically, and
certainly not by choice.

On Nov 22, 7:55�am, KLS wrote:
On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 21:26:03 -0600, Jim Redelfs





wrote:
In article ,
KLS wrote:

You could have saved yourself a lot of time, effort and money
by simply turning-off the transformer and removing the
doorbell button. �Let 'em KNOCK.

Nice idea

Thank-you.

but there are situations where that just won't
suffice: what about people who live up on the
third floor of a big house

Post a sign: �"Knock LOUDLY!"

or who are deaf

Post a sign: �"Knock REALLY LOUDLY!"

You must not know any deaf people personally. �Your ignorance is
showing.

and need lights to flash when someone rings? �

That's a good question. �How did these unfortunate people manage before
electricity? �After all, it's doing WITHOUT all these annoying and
unnecessary conveniences that will save the planet.

They survived by being cut off from the world, basically, and
certainly not by choice. �- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

sad.........

you could install a small crank generator, to power whatever
annuciator you want.

or get a dog, our bell rarely rings, dog knows somone is coming before
they are near the house.

dog helps keep my feet warm at night.

always happy to see me arrive home.

often nicer and friendlier than my wife

On Nov 19, 9:21 pm, "Bill" wrote:
Wired doorbells have a transformer which is always on and always using
electricity. This is yet one more thing in the house which does this like
TV, microwave, remote control things, things with clocks, plug-in phones,
etc.


Nickel and dime stuff, not to mention the time you put into the
conversion.

This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!

Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate "vampire
loads" in my house and reduce my electric bill?

Anyway here are the facts about "vampire power" for those who are interested
in this (can be 5% of your electric bill and 75% of the power for electronic
things is used while the devices are turned off!)....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standby_power

Bill wrote:
This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!

Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate "vampire
loads" in my house and reduce my electric bill?

Anyway here are the facts about "vampire power" for those who are interested
in this (can be 5% of your electric bill and 75% of the power for electronic
things is used while the devices are turned off!)....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standby_power


Many years ago when I started working on
electronic devices, I worked in a TV repair
shop when television sets had tubes, not
just a picture tube but the whole freaking
chassis. The heat put out by an old tube
type TV set was enough to keep a small
house warm. There was a considerable wait
for the dinosaur video displays to come to
life because all those tubes had to warm up.
As a convenience feature, manufacturers
added a feature called "instant on". This
kept all those tube filaments warm with
partial power. I imagine the standby power
for the old sets would be enough to run more
than several modern televisions. One of the
TV manufacturers held a seminar in town for
all of their dealers where they showed off
the new line of televisions that had the new
fangled switching power supplies that allowed
a solid state transistorized TV to operate
on less than a hundred watts of power and when
the incoming line voltage dropped as low as 80
volts AC. It was an impressive demonstration
on that day 35 years ago.

TDD

In article ,
KLS wrote:

Post a sign: "Knock REALLY LOUDLY!"

You must not know any deaf people personally.

Au contraire, my condescending "friend". He would find my approach to
this inane thread quite amusing.

Your ignorance is showing.

You are mistaking cynicism for ignorance.
--
JR

In article ,
"Bill" wrote:

This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!

More than one, to be sure.

Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate
"vampire loads" in my house and reduce my electric bill?

Since you finally revealed the motivation for your actions, I can
address it specifically: Your efforts, particularly with the doorbell
transformer switch, are misapplied.

If, instead of using the clothes dryer, you were to hang a couple or
three loads of laundry on a line to dry, you would save more money on
your electric bill than you would during a lifetime without so-called
"phantom" loads against your bill.

Anyway here are the facts about "vampire power" for those
who are interested in this

I couldn't care less about the vampire power consumption in my home.
The cost of such usage is the price I pay - WILLINGLY - for the
convenience of not worrying about such trivial and ridiculous things.

I cheerfully decline to unplug my cell phone charger between uses. That
the transformer powering my rarely used doorbell consumes power does not
concern me in the least.

My home is well insulated. My motor vehicles are sufficiently fuel
efficient for what they do for me. I turn off lights in unoccupied
rooms and turn down the thermostat (during heating season) during the
night and when the house is unoccupied. Likewise, I turn it up (during
the cooling season) under the same conditions.

I do not litter. I sparingly use the most benign, approved chemicals
that will do what I need.

With all of that done, I am content to ignore so-called "phantom" or
"vampire" energy consumption. It is, comparatively, such a miniscule
part of my total energy consumption, that I don't even think of it.
This silly thread has caused me to think of it and, in doing so, I am
even more convinced now that I am doing the right thing.

I appreciate your conservation efforts although I believe your time
would be more productive spent volunteering at a hospital or social
support organization.

If, after you have implemented all the "first tier" conservation
practices and improvements, you wish to further pursue the incredibly
minor conservation items, be my guest.

I thank God that I live in a country and society where you are free to
pursue such things. I further thank God that I am free to NOT do
likewise. I will always remain vigilant that such freedom continues
despite the ongoing efforts of those that would deny those freedoms.

Translation: I will vigorously oppose the day when a Doorbell
Transformer Switch is mandated by my government at any level.

Second translation: Stick a CF bulb in it and SCREW IT!
--

JR

Bill wrote:

This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!

Nope, most are just rubbing your nose in your stupidity.

Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate "vampire loads" in my house and reduce my electric
bill?

No one is getting upset, just rubbing your nose in your stupidity.

Anyway here are the facts about "vampire power" for those who are interested in this (can be 5% of your electric bill
and 75% of the
power for electronic things is used while the devices are turned off!)....

Not with a single doorbell, stupid.

And just replacing the transformer with a modern switch mode wall wart
will save almost all the power it currently uses, tho it still isnt cost efficient.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standby_power

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:36:31 -0600, Jim Redelfs
wrote:

In article ,
KLS wrote:

Post a sign: "Knock REALLY LOUDLY!"

You must not know any deaf people personally.

Au contraire, my condescending "friend". He would find my approach to
this inane thread quite amusing.

And he'd laugh at your earlier comment about how sad you think it is
that deaf people probably voted?

Your ignorance is showing.

You are mistaking cynicism for ignorance.

No, I'm seeing contempt, not cynicism.

Jim Redelfs wrote:
In article ,
"Bill" wrote:

This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!

More than one, to be sure.

Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate
"vampire loads" in my house and reduce my electric bill?

Since you finally revealed the motivation for your actions, I can
address it specifically: Your efforts, particularly with the doorbell
transformer switch, are misapplied.

If, instead of using the clothes dryer, you were to hang a couple or
three loads of laundry on a line to dry, you would save more money on
your electric bill than you would during a lifetime without so-called
"phantom" loads against your bill.

Anyway here are the facts about "vampire power" for those
who are interested in this

I couldn't care less about the vampire power consumption in my home.
The cost of such usage is the price I pay - WILLINGLY - for the
convenience of not worrying about such trivial and ridiculous things.

I cheerfully decline to unplug my cell phone charger between uses. That
the transformer powering my rarely used doorbell consumes power does not
concern me in the least.

My home is well insulated. My motor vehicles are sufficiently fuel
efficient for what they do for me. I turn off lights in unoccupied
rooms and turn down the thermostat (during heating season) during the
night and when the house is unoccupied. Likewise, I turn it up (during
the cooling season) under the same conditions.

I do not litter. I sparingly use the most benign, approved chemicals
that will do what I need.

With all of that done, I am content to ignore so-called "phantom" or
"vampire" energy consumption. It is, comparatively, such a miniscule
part of my total energy consumption, that I don't even think of it.
This silly thread has caused me to think of it and, in doing so, I am
even more convinced now that I am doing the right thing.

I appreciate your conservation efforts although I believe your time
would be more productive spent volunteering at a hospital or social
support organization.

If, after you have implemented all the "first tier" conservation
practices and improvements, you wish to further pursue the incredibly
minor conservation items, be my guest.

I thank God that I live in a country and society where you are free to
pursue such things. I further thank God that I am free to NOT do
likewise. I will always remain vigilant that such freedom continues
despite the ongoing efforts of those that would deny those freedoms.

Translation: I will vigorously oppose the day when a Doorbell
Transformer Switch is mandated by my government at any level.

Second translation: Stick a CF bulb in it and SCREW IT!


The other point worth making is that the power and cost figures for
standby power are routinely exaggerated. Those with political interest
in having everyone else unplug everything are either not competent in
the subject, or are happy to be lses than honest to try to motivate
others to unplug.

And of course, biggest of all... youve only got one life, try to spend
the time doing something useful. Speaking of which.... later.

NT

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:40:02 -0800, "Bill"
wrote:

This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!

Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate "vampire
loads" in my house and reduce my electric bill?

Anyway here are the facts about "vampire power" for those who are interested
in this (can be 5% of your electric bill and 75% of the power for electronic
things is used while the devices are turned off!)....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standby_power


Pleae do not confuse Wikipedia for facts. As to that 75% number, it is
highly suspect.

Again, a simple cost/benefit analysis would show the best path to
follow. However, simple math is beyond many people who blindly follow
whatever the current fad is (be it global warming, electric cars, or
whatever) in an attempt to appear 'on top of things', and 'all wise'.

In the end, sure you can save a few penny's of electricity, and spend
dollars doing so. And perhaps you feel good doing it that way. Fine,
it's your house, as long as no one else gets hurt, go for it. But, if
you are really interested in saving money (or energy) then I'd
recommend thinking about what you are doing, looking at real numbers,
analyzing the various factors (including items such as startup
current) and seeing what is the real best solution.

Bill wrote:
This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!

Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate "vampire
loads" in my house and reduce my electric bill?

Just because someone replies does not mean they are getting "upset".
They are just taking part in a discussion. This is what USENET is.

--
Art

On Nov 23, 11:40*am, PeterD wrote:
On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 16:40:02 -0800, "Bill"

wrote:
This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!

Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate "vampire
loads" in my house and reduce my electric bill?

Anyway here are the facts about "vampire power" for those who are interested
in this (can be 5% of your electric bill and 75% of the power for electronic
things is used while the devices are turned off!)....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standby_power

Please do not confuse Wikipedia for facts. As to that 75% number, it is
highly suspect.

Again, a simple cost/benefit analysis would show the best path to
follow. However, simple math is beyond many people who blindly follow
whatever the current fad is (be it global warming, electric cars, or
whatever) in an attempt to appear 'on top of things', and 'all wise'.

In the end, sure you can save a few penny's of electricity, and spend
dollars doing so. And perhaps you feel good doing it that way. Fine,
it's your house, as long as no one else gets hurt, go for it. But, if
you are really interested in saving money (or energy) then I'd
recommend thinking about what you are doing, looking at real numbers,
analyzing the various factors (including items such as startup
current) and seeing what is the real best solution.

Exactly. What interested people here I think was the the fallacy and
futility of worrying about a minuscule amount of wasted energy;
equivalent perhaps to the home heat lost during time taken to have the
front door open on a cold day to bring in a few bags of groceries!

It's heartening though that in this day and age of wasteful and
prodigal monster homes, jacuzzi and swimming pool styles of living,
V8 Hummers etc. (A situation possibly being currently amended by
'tightening our belts'?) is that there is awareness and interest in
WHAT IS WORTH DOING to conserve.

What seems to escape many is that by spending many dollars to use
manufactured items one only saves a few cents worth of energy. All
manufactured items require resources and energy to manufacture. For
example how much elctrcity is required say, to refine iron ore, make
galvanized sheet steel and stamp out an electrical outlet box, along
with the energy required to run the factory in which it is made,
package it, transport it to a local retail outlet, stock the shelves,
buy or have screws to mount, bring it home, etc. etc. ??????

A neighbour (driven by a wife with virtually zero technical
appreciation) has gone all CFLs. Even for those locations where lights
are only used occasionally. Each CFL costs around $3 compared to the
25 cent el-cheapos I use and requires several manufacturing operations
involving electronic components and a very small amount of mercury.
But their electricity consumption has changed little.

Why? Because they like most here they use electrcity for heating. So
any waste heat from 'inefficient' old fashioned incandescent light
bulbs does not contribute to warming the home; likewise an
'inefficient' fridge etc. lost heat from an electric hot water tank
etc.

One item that does waste heat energy is a clothes dryer; it just
chucks warm damp air outside for some 20 to 30 minutes each time it is
run. Hey must cost that out! We run ours as little as possible and
whenver weather allows dry heavy items, blankets, towels etc. on our
two cothes lines. See item on clothe line supports.

Cheers.

My best friend has degrees in electronics, electrial power and once
was a design engineer for at the time a major power transformer
manufacturer.

I asdked him about standby losses, he rreports it depends on ntheb
transformer. they can be built to be ultra low, which cost more, or
lossy and cheap to build.

government should require energy efficency numbers on everything with
minimum standards

In article ,
KLS wrote:

And he'd laugh at your earlier comment about how sad you
think it is that deaf people probably voted?

If that is how my comment was taken, I apologize. It was NOT directed
at deaf people.

You are mistaking cynicism for ignorance.

No, I'm seeing contempt, not cynicism.

In that case, again I apologize. I hold no contempt for those doing
what they like.
--

JR

In article ,
PeterD wrote:

In the end, sure you can save a few penny's of electricity,
and spend dollars doing so.

There is an old phrase for that. It predates the concept of "green" and
energy conservation by some centuries:

Penny wise and pound foolish.

'Nuff said.
--

JR

In article
,
" wrote:

government should require energy efficency numbers on
everything with minimum standards

I respectfully disagree.

It's more than enough that the government has mandated energy efficiency
labels on MAJOR energy consuming items such as HVAC components, water
heaters, laundry equipment, refrigerators and freezers.

Mandating testing and labeling for energy efficiency on "everything"
from toasters (virtually 100% efficient, BTW) to doorbell transformers
would be too intrusive, costly and accomplish little if anything.

Government rarely "gets it right" with the big and important things. I
shudder to think of it getting into such trivial things.
--

JR

On Sun, 23 Nov 2008 10:24:08 -0600, Jim Redelfs
wrote:

In article ,
KLS wrote:

And he'd laugh at your earlier comment about how sad you
think it is that deaf people probably voted?

If that is how my comment was taken, I apologize. It was NOT directed
at deaf people.

You are mistaking cynicism for ignorance.

No, I'm seeing contempt, not cynicism.

In that case, again I apologize. I hold no contempt for those doing
what they like.

Apology accepted; thanks.

On Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:22:40 -0600, wrote:

On Wed, 19 Nov 2008 23:00:16 -0600, Dave Garland
wrote:

E Z Peaces wrote:
I've tried battery-powered wireless door chimes. I used AA alkalines,
which have a much longer shelf life than conventional carbon-zinc. The
problem was the current draw of the receivers. A set of batteries would
last only a few months, and a lot of visitors might leave frustrated
before I realized my chime was out of service.

Why use battery-powered chimes (as opposed to transmitters)? My
wireless chimes plug into outlets (upstairs and downstairs chimes).
Being as they make noise, it's not like precise location is critical.
The transmitters use a "N" battery every 3-4 years. You do have to
check occasionally to make sure it's still working.

The operating cost (75 cents per year for batteries, and whatever the
line draw is) is probably more than a transformer-operated bell but
we're way down in the noise range of expense.

Dave

The thing is, there is a doorbell that does not need any electrical
power. Simply mount a nice looking brass bell on the wall next to the
door, using a bracket. Drill a small hole in the wall a couple feet
above the bell, and attach a piece of nylon string to the bell. Push
the other end of the string thru the hole in the wall and let it hang
outside. Put a nice wooden bead on the end of the string. Then place
a sign that reads "PULL STRING FOR DOORBELL".

Cost: The price of the bell, bracket, string and bead. No further
costs for life, and no electrical energy needed ever.

Neat idea. I once used a metal crank that went through the middle of
the door and to a beautiful brass bell on the inside of the door. The
whole mechanism was unique and functional, although too ornate and too
loud for my taste. The Adams Family had a cool doorbell.

terry wrote:

One item that does waste heat energy is a clothes dryer; it just
chucks warm damp air outside for some 20 to 30 minutes each time it is
run. Hey must cost that out! We run ours as little as possible and
whenver weather allows dry heavy items, blankets, towels etc. on our
two cothes lines. See item on clothe line supports.


Only about half the time. During the winter, I dump the output of our
clothes dryer into the house. It adds humidity, heat, and overall comfort.

The CO monitor barely moves.

Bill wrote:
This thread has seemed to hit a nerve!

Why are so many people getting upset that I am working to eliminate
"vampire loads" in my house and reduce my electric bill?


The worry that you might reproduce?

wrote:

My best friend has degrees in electronics, electrial power and once was a
design engineer for at the time a major power transformer manufacturer.

But didnt manage to explain to you the most important difference, if he is even aware of it.

I asdked him about standby losses, he rreports it depends on ntheb
transformer. they can be built to be ultra low, which cost more, or
lossy and cheap to build.

Switch mode wall warts, with no transformer at all, both cost peanuts to build and have almost no standby losses.

government should require energy efficency numbers on everything with minimum standards

No thanks. I'll decide for myself what makes sense instead.

On Sun 23 Nov 2008 10:57:58a, Phisherman told us...

Neat idea. I once used a metal crank that went through the middle of
the door and to a beautiful brass bell on the inside of the door. The
whole mechanism was unique and functional, although too ornate and too
loud for my taste.

Those were very popular and common in Victorian times. I like them, and
they’re still available through that specialize in restoration items for
old homes.

We have a wireless doorbell that uses batteries in the doorbell housing and
buttons for both front and side doors. The batteries actually last quite a
long time. We’re on our third year on the present of batteries.

We also have a very heavy solid brass door knocker on the front door that
would wake the dead. People seem to use the doorbell and knocker equally.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)
************************************************** **********************
Date: Sunday, 11(XI)/23(XXIII)/08(MMVIII)
************************************************** **********************
Countdown till U.S. Thanksgiving Day
3dys 11hrs 2mins
************************************************** **********************
If a turtle doesn't have a shell, is he homeless or naked?

************************************************** **********************